(Original post by Drewski)
And you've given nothing but completely unfounded conjecture. You're getting the cynicism and condescension your post and attitude warrants.

Burden of proof. Look it up.

And you completely ignored the point about being entirely wrong about university entry.

is my claim unreasonable though?
I mean, prince william got into a very good uni with very medicore grades, like his father. it's the treatment they generally get. why a royal unnecessarily join the army to actually do proper work when he's bum-kissed and pampered his whole life. how would he cope?

(Original post by PurpleNerple)
is my claim unreasonable though?
I mean, prince william got into a very good uni with very medicore grades, like his father. it's the treatment they generally get. why a royal unnecessarily join the army to actually do proper work when he's bum-kissed and pampered his whole life. how would he cope?

No, it's not. It's not vaguely reasonable. Nor is it based on this thing called 'reality'.

You're comparing sets of completely different entry levels because you don't know what you're talking about.

You're taking **** about life in the armed forces because you don't know what you're talking about.

You're offering absolutely no proof for anything you're talking about and expecting other people to disprove you, rather than provide evidence you were right in the first place. You obviously get by on the delusion that you can talk utter bolleaux and nobody will call you out on it. Well, I'm calling you out. Prove what you're saying.

(Original post by Drewski)
No, it's not. It's not vaguely reasonable. Nor is it based on this thing called 'reality'.

You're comparing sets of completely different entry levels because you don't know what you're talking about.

You're taking **** about life in the armed forces because you don't know what you're talking about.

You're offering absolutely no proof for anything you're talking about and expecting other people to disprove you, rather than provide evidence you were right in the first place. You obviously get by on the delusion that you can talk utter bolleaux and nobody will call you out on it. Well, I'm calling you out. Prove what you're saying.

(Original post by Drewski)
Proving any of the drivel you've spouted would be a start.

it's fascinating how angry I've made you, isn't it?
I mean, shots fired. how dare I offend the royals, right?

Was his university entry completely 'unfair'?
Did either of them serve in some half-arsed manner where they didn't do any real work?

well, I'm now going to guess that you're going to tell me that getting into a university that requires A grades is "fair" if one gets a B and a C only alongside some other mystical quality that apparently only the royals possess. I wonder what that quality is.

and I never claimed that it was a fact. I merely implied that it was probably the case based on their lifestyles. why would a royal join the army other than for the reputation side of it? and how would a military officier really be able to treat a prince impartially and without privilege? the army is meant to be serving the royal family so obviously there are issues that will very likely arise. but, again, I'm expecting a very high threshold of what can be supposed. i.e. only the most strict supply of evidence will do for you. because you really like the royals, I take it. I don't know why you're being like this with the royals - I mean, are you really saying that they don't get *generally* privileged treatment in life? honestly?

(Original post by PurpleNerple)
well, I'm now going to guess that you're going to tell me that getting into a university that requires A grades is "fair" if one gets a B and a C based on some other mystical quality that apparently only the royals possess. I wonder what that quality is.

Actually, it's based on the fact that entry for that course that year was BBC.

and I never claimed that it was a fact. I merely implied that it was probably the case based on their lifestyles. why would a royal join the army other than for the reputation side of it? and how would a military officier really be able to treat a prince impartially and without privilege? the army is meant to be serving the royal family so obviously there are issues that will very likely arise. but, again, I'm expecting a very high threshold of what can be supposed. i.e. only the most strict supply of evidence will do for you. because you really like the royals, I take it. I don't know why you're being like this with the royals - I mean, are you really saying that they don't get *generally* privileged treatment in life? honestly?

Oh. Implication. Well that's fine. I can imply you're someone who has an inappropriate relationship with your mother. But because I'm not saying that's fact, I can get away with it. Good to know.

Actually, my objection is based on the fact that I, unlike you, have been in the armed forces. I know what the atmosphere is like. I saw one of the brothers in action.
You, on the other hand, are basing your knowledge on some weird hybrid of full metal jacket and bad lads army, assuming that that's what the military is because you don't know better.

Nobody in this world should be, or is, immune to criticism. When it's deserved, it's handed out. Plenty of 'the royals' have been pillocks. Andrew is regarded as a grade A numpty, for instance.
But when it's not deserved and is handed out anyway, you have to look at the person dishing it up.

What's your motivation for, basically, making up ****? Things like the university accusations. So easy to find out the truth, but instead you persist that only you could possibly be correct by applying current standards. Why? What's in it for you?

No it doesn't, unless you're going to count every single part of the state as "The Crown". The Royal estates are pretty small. The quite separate Crown Estate is about 330,000 acres. Which is less than, for example, the National Trust owns.